However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

From June 9, 2004 to November 30, 2009, the Defendant operated C Co., Ltd. established for the purpose of manufacturing electronic equipment from 906, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si.

1. On October 25, 2008, the Defendant: (a) filed a preliminary return of value-added tax for the second period of value-added tax for the above C in 2008 with Sungnam Tax Office; (b) although there was no fact that the Defendant received goods or services from D (E), the Defendant submitted a false list of total tax invoices by seller as if he received goods or services equivalent to KRW 50,000,000 for supply value.

2. On January 25, 2009, the Defendant filed a final return of value-added tax for the second period of 2008 against the above C in Sungnam Tax Office, and submitted a false list of tax invoices by seller, as if the supply price was supplied with goods or services equivalent to KRW 35,00,000, even though there was no fact that the Defendant received goods or services from the above D.

3. On April 25, 2009, the Defendant: (a) filed a preliminary return of value-added tax for the first time in 2009 with the Sungnam Tax Office on the said C; (b) on April 25, 2009, even though there was no fact that the Defendant received goods or services from the said D, the Defendant submitted a false list of the total tax invoices by seller as if he received goods or services equivalent to KRW 49,50,00

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the accusation, the closure report of investigation, and the list of total tax invoices by seller;

1. Article 11-2 (4) 3 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act (amended by Act No. 9346 of Jan. 30, 2009) and the selection of a sentence concerning the crime, and the selection of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act are against the accused, the fact that the accused has been punished twice by a fine, the records of the same punishment are once a fine, and the case that has been punished by a fine in this case and the case that has been terminated by the above fine can be punished concurrently.